The Lawsuit Continues., This is where we are, and what is happening. Options

[Shiny Penny]

Ooops, perhaps it was to SP, not Ian.

One last time - I am not Ian and I do not know who Ian is. I am Shiny Penny...just one cent, putting in my two cents worth.

[Pickle]

What I notice far too often is that when you are having to concede a point (or it's more like trying to avoid conceding the point), you slosh around some other allegations, as if to say, well if he wasn't wrong on that one thing, he surely was wrong on the other.

Did you miss where AppleTree referred to the early allegations, which included those about Tommy, and mentioned Don Schneider's name? I was merely commenting on what he said.

[appletree]

Did you miss where AppleTree referred to the early allegations, which included those about Tommy, and mentioned Don Schneider's name? I was merely commenting on what he said.

No, you weren't. Sp is totally correct. All one needs to do is go back through months of post to see exactly what we are talking about. It's uncanny! When you can't answer one thing, you jump in with another accusation. I noticed Ian ask a question about the latest court hearing and you avoided that also. Speaking of....

Let me see if I have this right. From reading the latest court records which Ian so graciously provides, here is my summary:

You have filed a motion or request for all of Danny Shelton's personal financial records. Why? This is part of your defense. How? You want to prove that you have not lied and slandered Danny on the internet by proving your accusations of wrong doing are true. But, the only way that you could prove that what you are saying is true, is by getting the financial records. So, if you need the financial records to prove wrong doing on Danny's part, how could you be making all these accusations in the meantime with no proof to back it up??? In other words, whether you succeed or not in getting the records, the fact is, you have been slandering and defaming all of this time because you have not had access to anything to confirm your accusations. If you did, you wouldn't be trying so hard to get his records. If that's not a backwards mess and proof that you don't have proof, I don't know what is.

[justice4jesus]

You have filed a motion or request for all of Danny Shelton's personal financial records. Why? This is part of your defense. How? You want to prove that you have not lied and slandered Danny on the internet by proving your accusations of wrong doing are true. But, the only way that you could prove that what you are saying is true, is by getting the financial records. So, if you need the financial records to prove wrong doing on Danny's part, how could you be making all these accusations in the meantime with no proof to back it up??? In other words, whether you succeed or not in getting the records, the fact is, you have been slandering and defaming all of this time because you have not had access to anything to confirm your accusations. If you did, you wouldn't be trying so hard to get his records. If that's not a backwards mess and proof that you don't have proof, I don't know what is.

Appletree, did you stop and think about this post before making it? The statement from your post that I bolded above all but gives Bob the proof that he needs! You made no statement or implication that evidence of wrongdoing would NOT be found in Danny's financial records, but you directly stated that those records would be "the only way" for Bob to prove that what he has been saying is true.

Right or wrong, this is why the mind and the mouth (or in this case, the keyboard) should be permanently interfaced.

[justice4jesus]

Right or wrong, this is why the mind and the mouth (or in this case, the keyboard) should be permanently interfaced.

BTW, even if I do say so myself, I find the statement "the mind and the mouth should be permanently interfaced" to be quite profound, so I want everyone to remember that it was I who said it first!

I know that the idea has been around for many years, but not with those words.


This post has been edited by justice4jesus: Mar 6 2008, 01:45 PM

[GRAT]

BTW, even if I do say so myself, I find the statement "the mind and the mouth should be permanently interfaced" to be quite profound, so I want everyone to remember that it was I who said it first!

I know that the idea has been around for many years, but not with those words.

profoundly profound!

[Dona]

Appletree, did you stop and think about this post before making it? The statement from your post that I bolded above all but gives Bob the proof that he needs! You made no statement or implication that evidence of wrongdoing would NOT be found in Danny's financial records, but you directly stated that those records would be "the only way" for Bob to prove that what he has been saying is true.

Right or wrong, this is why the mind and the mouth (or in this case, the keyboard) should be permanently interfaced.

What I got from what appletree was pointing out is that Bob has made accusations, maligning and slandering, and spreading it abroad and he had no proof, one way or the other, whether what he was saying was true or not. In other words, he now was back tracking and trying to find evidence that would give him proof that he was in the right and not guilty of anything wrong. AT's statement does not give Bob any proof of anything no matter how you spin it.

There is a lesson here. As Christians we should all be careful not to repeat rumor and accuse when we have no factual proof but are relying upon something someone may have told us or our own surmising. "Thou shalt not kill" includes the character and reputations of our fellowman.

Dona

[lurker]

There is more than enough evidence to prove it. Documents that we all have seen that prove the guilt of the plaintiffs cite other documents which would be helpful in order to complete the larger picture and to reveal motives and intent. Documents which are legally supposed to be readily alvailable to the public are not where they should be. Documents have been "lost". So much of the evidence is being hidden that it is like pulling teeth to get hold of it.

And those who have the legal responsibility to make it available seem to have been led by someone to believe they are aiding God by breaking at least one of the commandments.

[justice4jesus]

What I got from what appletree was pointing out is that Bob has made accusations, maligning and slandering, and spreading it abroad and he had no proof, one way or the other, whether what he was saying was true or not. In other words, he now was back tracking and trying to find evidence that would give him proof that he was in the right and not guilty of anything wrong. AT's statement does not give Bob any proof of anything no matter how you spin it.

There is a lesson here. As Christians we should all be careful not to repeat rumor and accuse when we have no factual proof but are relying upon something someone may have told us or our own surmising. "Thou shalt not kill" includes the character and reputations of our fellowman.

Dona

First of all, it has been stated here by the pro-Danny side that it is all in how things are worded. One can clearly see how this is worded in black and white. No "spin" is needed, even if that is what I was trying to do, which it is not.

Second, I really wasn't addressing you. You, Ian and Appletree are really bad about that, and to be honest, that's really kind of annoying. When I ask someone to explain themselves, the first person I want to hear from is the one from whom I requested the explanation. After that, I have no problem with open discussion.

[fallible humanbe...]

First of all, it has been stated here by the pro-Danny side that it is all in how things are worded. One can clearly see how this is worded in black and white. No "spin" is needed, even if that is what I was trying to do, which it is not.

Second, I really wasn't addressing you. You, Ian and Appletree are really bad about that, and to be honest, that's really kind of annoying. When I ask someone to explain themselves, the first person I want to hear from is the one from whom I requested the explanation. After that, I have no problem with open discussion.

j4j,

This is an open forum . . . as such that means any member can respond to any post, in any order they desire . . . if you don't want to hear from anyone but the one you responded to - block everyone else . . . otherwise, you get what you get regardless of whether it annoys you or not

- FHB

(disclaimer: yes, I do realize that we all post here at the pleasure of Calvin and his admins - not taking it for granted, just making a salient point)

[justice4jesus]

j4j,

This is an open forum . . . as such that means any member can respond to any post, in any order they desire . . . if you don't want to hear from anyone but the one you responded to - block everyone else . . . otherwise, you get what you get regardless of whether it annoys you or not

- FHB

(disclaimer: yes, I do realize that we all post here at the pleasure of Calvin and his admins - not taking it for granted, just making a salient point)

Not that I should have to explain my last post, but what I'm saying is that it is impolite to just jump in and "answer" a question that has been asked of someone else specifically. I certainly do not need you to tell me how to conduct my business here. If there are changes to be made in the way I handle myself here, Calvin and/or an admin will let me know.

[Dona]

First of all, it has been stated here by the pro-Danny side that it is all in how things are worded. One can clearly see how this is worded in black and white. No "spin" is needed, even if that is what I was trying to do, which it is not.

Second, I really wasn't addressing you. You, Ian and Appletree are really bad about that, and to be honest, that's really kind of annoying. When I ask someone to explain themselves, the first person I want to hear from is the one from whom I requested the explanation. After that, I have no problem with open discussion.

J4J, are you saying it is alright for you to jump in the middle of a conversation between Bob and AT and give your take on what AT was saying but it is not alright for me to do the same and give my take on what AT was saying? That is what I was doing. It was not my motive or intent to annoy you. No one can annoy, anger etc., us unless we choose to be so. Unfortunately a lot of people go through life blaming everyone and everything for the choices they themselves have made.

Dona

edited for repeating a word.

This post has been edited by Dona: Mar 7 2008, 03:36 AM

[Johann]

Unfortunately a lot of people go through life blaming everyone and everything for the choices they themselves have made.

Dona

I agree with you fully on that point, Donna. I would never have taken part in these discussions if this had not taken place. I did when I discovered Danny Shelton was hurling people into his bandwagon for just that purpose, and this is not what behooves the leader of a Christian Ministry. And now he is attempting to justify his evil actions with the aid of a battery of lawyers to save his touchy skin.

It also makes me cringe as I see some of you twisting many word of mine to mean something that was not my intention. Would the Holy Spirit work like that? Could there be an evil spirit - perhaps the same one who appeared to Brenda one night - be behind such actions? I have often wondered why an evil spirit started this whole thing. Does that give you a better asssurance that you are doing the right thing?

Johann

[Dona]

I agree with you fully on that point, Donna. I would never have taken part in these discussions if this had not taken place. I did when I discovered Danny Shelton was hurling people into his bandwagon for just that purpose, and this is not what behooves the leader of a Christian Ministry. And now he is attempting to justify his evil actions with the aid of a battery of lawyers to save his touchy skin.

It also makes me cringe as I see some of you twisting many word of mine to mean something that was not my intention. Would the Holy Spirit work like that? Could there be an evil spirit - perhaps the same one who appeared to Brenda one night - be behind such actions? I have often wondered why an evil spirit started this whole thing. Does that give you a better asssurance that you are doing the right thing?

Johann

I do not agree that an evil spirit started “this whole thing”. Our enemy cannot make us do anything that we ourselves do not choose to think, say or do. "The devil made me do it" is a cop out. We each have a responsibility to learn to control ourselves. We can only achieve self control if we are totally asking and relying upon our Lord Jesus Christ to teach and guide us; to live his life in us, for us and through us. We cannot do it on our own. But some still do things on their own and maybe feel justified because they themselves have made mistakes or wrong choices based upon things they have heard, hurt feelings or having suffered the consequences of their own choices. From what I have read on the forums it is mainly those who have a personal grievance or have heard things from others with a personal grievance that have put out the gossip and misinformation and with no factual proof of anything they say or do. I do not see this kind of behavior as from the Lord. We shall know His by their fruits. It doesn't matter the reasons for what they do or have done in the past. What matters is setting things right today; going to the Lord and finally putting ourselves completely in His hands.

Dona

[Dona]

There is more than enough evidence to prove it. Documents that we all have seen that prove the guilt of the plaintiffs cite other documents which would be helpful in order to complete the larger picture and to reveal motives and intent. Documents which are legally supposed to be readily alvailable to the public are not where they should be. Documents have been "lost". So much of the evidence is being hidden that it is like pulling teeth to get hold of it.

And those who have the legal responsibility to make it available seem to have been led by someone to believe they are aiding God by breaking at least one of the commandments.

You have lost me because I cannot figure out what you are saying and not sure you do either. What documents prove the guilt of the plaintiffs? You seem to think you have seen such and that they cited other documents which should be available to the public but not there or hidden; all very sinister. Could it be that they have never been?